Pfft... you work in fast food?

[Shadow Wolf]

You're assuming child workers were forced to labor for MS. So before you jump to tangents based on your premise, why don't you simply prove this first. Site a source.

Child slavery for resources is widely used. Hershey's, Mars, Kraft, Godiva, and Nestle all use child labor from the Ivory Coast to obtain the raw ingredients for their chocolate. Nike, the Gap, Walmart, Sears, Disney, they all have have sweat shops and severely exploited labor that is slave labor in all but name.

 

[suncowiam]

Child slavery for resources is widely used. Hershey's, Mars, Kraft, Godiva, and Nestle all use child labor from the Ivory Coast to obtain the raw ingredients for their chocolate. Nike, the Gap, Walmart, Sears, Disney, they all have have sweat shops and severely exploited labor that is slave labor in all but name.

Let's assume you're correct so I'll simply pass on trying to prove that first.

I agree there should be moral standards that all organizations have to live up to. Forcing labor on the young is not acceptable in my view. I would be shoulder to shoulder with you in stopping such practices.

 

[suncowiam]

I'm assuming? Interesting... I had assumed the exploitation tech companies did was common knowledge.
Quickly googled it, there is a plethora of different results on Microsoft and similar countries.
http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-slammed-over-child-labor-accusations-2010-4
https://www.rt.com/news/329420-amnesty-cobalt-child-labor-apple/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...labour-abuse-at-chinese-supplier-1946356.html


I did no such thing. Reread.

However I would also challenge you if you think worker exploitation is not everywhere in the first world as well.

You jumped from ms to all companies. Well yeah, you moved the goals... I wouldn't disagree with you now. OK, I admit not ALL companies adhere to morals standards. Does that imply that ALL companies DO NOT adhere to moral standards. This exactly the point of a stereotyping conversation.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Let's assume you're correct so I'll simply pass on trying to prove that first.

I am correct.

I agree there should be moral standards that all organizations have to live up to. Forcing labor on the young is not acceptable in my view. I would be shoulder to shoulder with you in stopping such practices.

One of the main issues is if those moral standards are upheld, our prices for goods will go up. We can live so cheaply because so many are exploited. And that is such a huge obstacle to over come that even during swells of patriotic pride movements to "buy American" don't live long and they fail.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You jumped from ms to all companies. Well yeah, you moved the goals... I wouldn't disagree with you now. OK, I admit not ALL companies adhere to morals standards. Does that imply that ALL companies DO NOT adhere to moral standards. This exactly the point of a stereotyping conversation.

If it's a tech company, they are having stuff built in China. Microsoft does sell to the Chinese government, and what they sell is being used to censor the internet and repress the people. And they do get stuff for their chips and other components from materials harvested by child labor in places such as the DRC.

 

[suncowiam]

I've had a long busy day. Will place these topics on hold and will get back to each of you when I can. Thanks

 

[gnomon]

Actually I was very on point with the topic. People want to stereotype others but don't want to be stereotyped.

It's hypocrisy.

If you think I hijacked this thread, you can bring it up with the mods and deal with it properly. Or you can even address me first and not be passive aggressive.

It still is a good discussion with perspectives from all sides. Thats just my opinion.

[Edited]
I see you've updated your response to be more polite. I appreciate that. I also welcome an open and honest conversation if you're interested.

I apologize for being polite.

There was absolutely no hypocrisy in the OP.

You failed in a simple reading exercise.

And I'm only going to talk about the OP so I don't really care about any of your other posts in this thread because they've done nothing more than derail the original topic.

Thanks to Sunstone who actually posted the best response so far.

But here's your soapbox....stand proud and loud.

Was that too passive for you?

Unless Quintessance actually chimes in and says "yes, in a round about way I was talking about the rich and the poor". which I doubt, your underlying claim of hypocrisy is false.

So assuming a false premise in accordance with the original topic and the thread runs with the false premise.......yeah.....hijacking.

But hey......this forum has to become more interesting.

And this might be a little bit more interesting.

I don't know.

edit: But just know this..........I love you.

 

[suncowiam]

I apologize for being polite.

There was absolutely no hypocrisy in the OP.

You failed in a simple reading exercise.

And I'm only going to talk about the OP so I don't really care about any of your other posts in this thread because they've done nothing more than derail the original topic.

Thanks to Sunstone who actually posted the best response so far.

But here's your soapbox....stand proud and loud.

Was that too passive for you?

Unless Quintessance actually chimes in and says "yes, in a round about way I was talking about the rich and the poor". which I doubt, your underlying claim of hypocrisy is false.

So assuming a false premise in accordance with the original topic and the thread runs with the false premise.......yeah.....hijacking.

But hey......this forum has to become more interesting.

And this might be a little bit more interesting.

I don't know.

edit: But just know this..........I love you.

I have several posts to reply to others but I will start with you and slowly work my way through all this.

First off, I appreciate you being up front and addressing what ever issues you have with me or my beliefs, to me directly. I always appreciate that in folks to just be frank and direct about their thoughts and feelings.

Yes, I will stand on top of soap box. I feel this is the right thing to do. That's the whole point of any forum based on religion and politics. What's the point of being here, otherwise?

Here is my overall ideal. Folks tend to narrow their cause but it only puts light on part of the situation. I understand the OP was very specific about stereotyping the poor. I asked the question, albeit indirectly, why are we narrowing the ideal of stereotyping to one corner of the income spectrum? Why not extend this ideal of stereotyping to all income? Isn't that the objective thing to do? Defining poor and rich is subjective and arbitrary.

My whole point, which I believe to be a fair point, is not to stereotype based on any and all income. Assumptions that are made of the poor is the same as assumptions made of the rich. It's the same exact thing. So if you're defending assumptions based on the poor then you should be defending assumptions based on the rich. It's all the same.

Here's my view about wealth. I believe it is a right and a liberty. No... Not to become filthy rich and treat people like dirt. In more detail, it is the liberty accumulate property no matter how much. If I legally obtained this property, no other can rightfully take it away from me. I cannot take what you've accumulated and you cannot take what I've accumulated. Any amount described is just plain arbitrary. Some folks just like to accumulate things to no amount. Call them hoarders if you like. But if they can and did it legally, then I personally have no complaints.

I think there is a rule against hijacking? I mean if I started talking about how my Golden State Warriors just lost another important game and how I'm laboring over this fact. Then All I did was focus on this which clearly has no relation to the OP, I'm pretty sure I'll get responses from the Mods.

 

[suncowiam]

Child slavery for resources is widely used. Hershey's, Mars, Kraft, Godiva, and Nestle all use child labor from the Ivory Coast to obtain the raw ingredients for their chocolate. Nike, the Gap, Walmart, Sears, Disney, they all have have sweat shops and severely exploited labor that is slave labor in all but name.

I am correct.

One of the main issues is if those moral standards are upheld, our prices for goods will go up. We can live so cheaply because so many are exploited. And that is such a huge obstacle to over come that even during swells of patriotic pride movements to "buy American" don't live long and they fail.

I did no such thing, you made assumptions.

To Rowan: Then I made a mistake or misunderstood you. I'm lost at where we are in our discussion then.

To those stating corporations are using child labor.

To try and be fair to all of you, I did a search on this. Here are some of the links:

http://www.slavefreechocolate.org/children-slavery-cocoa/

http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-slammed-over-child-labor-accusations-2010-4

http://techcrunch.com/2016/01/19/ap...-tech-firms-implicated-in-child-labor-report/

http://fortune.com/2016/01/19/apple-child-labor/

http://www.theguardian.com/sustaina...and-fighting-child-labour-lawsuit-ivory-coast

Ok, after reading through various articles assuming, like we normally do when siting sources, that they're all true... The assessment I've come with is that these are allegations. I could not conclude that these companies are systematically using child labor on their own will. Now before, you get in an uproar just wait. I stated that because I truly came to that assessment or maybe I do have some bias. Well, ignorance is not bliss so the companies do bear responsibility even if it was unwillingly done. These companies should answer those allegations and prove once and for all that they are not using child labor even by chance. If there is even a doubt, then they should pause production or processes.

Nestle was the only company admitting to knowingly have used child labor. Although, they suggested it was indirect, they acknowledged it and vowed to fix it. But here's my question back to you. Do you think that like human beings, corporations can make mistakes, and if they vow to fix it plus accepting penalties, do you believe they can be forgiven if their new model is one that is moral and just? Or do you think, the entire company should be shut down?

 

[gnomon]

I have several posts to reply to others but I will start with you and slowly work my way through all this.

First off, I appreciate you being up front and addressing what ever issues you have with me or my beliefs, to me directly. I always appreciate that in folks to just be frank and direct about their thoughts and feelings.

Yes, I will stand on top of soap box. I feel this is the right thing to do. That's the whole point of any forum based on religion and politics. What's the point of being here?

Here is my overall ideal. Folks tend to narrow their cause but it only puts light on part of the situation. I understand the OP was very specific about stereotyping the poor. I asked the question, albeit indirectly, why are we narrowing the ideal of stereotyping to one corner of the income spectrum? Why not extend this ideal of stereotyping to all income? Isn't that the objective thing to do? Defining poor and rich is subjective and arbitrary.

My whole point, which I believe to be a fair point, is not to stereotype based on any and all income. Assumptions that are made of the poor is the same as assumptions made of the rich. It's the same exact thing. So if you're defending assumptions based on the poor then you should be defending assumptions based on the rich. It's all the same.

Here's my view about wealth. I believe it is a right and a liberty. No... Not to become filthy rich and treat people like dirt. In more detail, it is the liberty accumulate property no matter how much. If I legally obtained this property, no other can rightfully take it away from me. I cannot take what you've accumulated and you cannot take what I've accumulated. Any amount described is just plain arbitrary. Some folks just like to accumulate things to no amount. Call them hoarders if you like. But if they can and did it legally, then I personally have no complaints.

I think there is a rule against hijacking? I mean if I started talking about how my Golden State Warriors just lost another important game and how I'm laboring over this fact. And all I did was focus on this which clearly has no relation to the OP, I'm pretty sure I'll get responses from the Mods.

That.......was an excellent post.

Yet....it doesn't address the original post one bit.

Personally....I have no problem with you.

If you have not got it yet I'm talking about the issues Quintessance addressed in his original post. And that is all it is about.

He raised a very specific point in regards to class issues and cultural issue in regards to certain professions.

You claimed a hypocrisy without providing a single bit of evidence to back up your claim.

And the entire thread since went from what could have been an important discussion about how numerous cultures regards certain professions and class issues became......nonsense.

That is clearly it.

The OP made no stereotypes upon the rich. I ask you to reread the OP and find such a statement. Find evidence for your accusations. The OP was discussing stereotypes about class and profession without regard to financial success. Perhaps because it focused on Western professions it was overlooked.

Reread it. Than we shall go on.

 

[suncowiam]

That.......was an excellent post.

Yet....it doesn't address the original post one bit.

Personally....I have no problem with you.

If you have not got it yet I'm talking about the issues Quintessance addressed in his original post. And that is all it is about.

He raised a very specific point in regards to class issues and cultural issue in regards to certain professions.

You claimed a hypocrisy without providing a single bit of evidence to back up your claim.

And the entire thread since went from what could have been an important discussion about how numerous cultures regards certain professions and class issues became......nonsense.

That is clearly it.

The OP made no stereotypes upon the rich. I ask you to reread the OP and find such a statement. Find evidence for your accusations. The OP was discussing stereotypes about class and profession without regard to financial success. Perhaps because it focused on Western professions it was overlooked.

Reread it. Than we shall go on.

Ok, yes, we shouldn't stereotype the poor. There, that was as you asked.

Let me ask you, if we should stereotype the rich?

 

[gnomon]

Ok, yes, we shouldn't stereotype the poor. There, that was as you asked.

Let me ask you, if we should stereotype the rich?

Nope.

You still don't get it.

The OP was not stereotyping the poor or the rich.

I'm trying to think of an example......

Imagine prostitutes who make a lot of money in a regulated market. Much of society will look down on them. Yet they make a mad amount of money.

Imagine hedge fund managers who made out rich after the 2008 real estate collapse. They made a lot of money and got rich but many people looked down on the way they made their fortune.

Imagine an individual stuck in a basic field, such as construction, that they worked as an underage employee but left caring for their family and they sacrifice their lives to care for their family in the only way they know how. Yet working in basic construction they are considered lower class.

Yes....stereotypes are bad. And that's the point of the OP.

The OP didn't make a single disparaging remark about rich people. You raised it.

The OP was talking about the issue of how, in any given culture, people look down upon those who work menial jobs and...to add...those menial jobs are as important as more important jobs such as being a doctor, a lawyer, etc.

It's not about rich versus poor. There was no hypocrisy introduced but the issue of class issues involved in regards to professions that many cultures consider basic and ... if I read correctly...disrespectful.

That was the issue.

It's about basic ****ing respect for those who endure menial labor and jobs yet are considered unworthy.....

You introduced rich versus poor.

You are the one who made it something more about hypocrisy.

Which the OP was not.

The OP was not making a distinction between rich and poor. It was making a distinction in class attitudes towards professions.

It's right there in the OP.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I could not conclude that these companies are systematically using child labor on their own will.

It's not they have their own "child labor" division, but when a company like Hershey's buys raw cocoa from the Ivory Coast, they are purchasing things harvested from child labor. When Microsoft is getting materials for their chips, they don't have their own workers gather things such as cobalt, they get it from vendors who themselves got it from child labor.

 

[suncowiam]

Nope.

You still don't get it.

The OP was not stereotyping the poor or the rich.

I'm trying to think of an example......

Imagine prostitutes who make a lot of money in a regulated market. Much of society will look down on them. Yet they make a mad amount of money.

Imagine hedge fund managers who made out rich after the 2008 real estate collapse. They made a lot of money and got rich but many people looked down on the way they made their fortune.

Imagine an individual stuck in a basic field, such as construction, that they worked as an underage employee but left caring for their family and they sacrifice their lives to care for their family in the only way they know how. Yet working in basic construction they are considered lower class.

Yes....stereotypes are bad. And that's the point of the OP.

The OP didn't make a single disparaging remark about rich people. You raised it.

The OP was talking about the issue of how, in any given culture, people look down upon those who work menial jobs and...to add...those menial jobs are as important as more important jobs such as being a doctor, a lawyer, etc.

It's not about rich versus poor. There was no hypocrisy introduced but the issue of class issues involved in regards to professions that many cultures consider basic and ... if I read correctly...disrespectful.

That was the issue.

It's about basic ****ing respect for those who endure menial labor and jobs yet are considered unworthy.....

You introduced rich versus poor.

You are the one who made it something more about hypocrisy.

Which the OP was not.

The OP was not making a distinction between rich and poor. It was making a distinction in class attitudes towards professions.

It's right there in the OP.

Fair enough. I extended the topic albeit top quickly is the conclusion? =) It didn't make sense if I just created a separate post about stereotyping the rich in a debate forum, at least, IMO.

Ok, well, I think we're kind of beating a dead horse for a bit too long on this. So I'll respectfully just step away from this conversation. Thank you again for sharing your feedback.

 

[suncowiam]

It's not they have their own "child labor" division, but when a company like Hershey's buys raw cocoa from the Ivory Coast, they are purchasing things harvested from child labor. When Microsoft is getting materials for their chips, they don't have their own workers gather things such as cobalt, they get it from vendors who themselves got it from child labor.

I agree with that point as I've alluded to in my previous comment. I also mentioned they should pause their production until they can give assurance of the matter. They should also be penalized even if it was indirectly done.

What else would you personally like a company to do in such a situation?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I agree with that point as I've alluded to in my previous comment. I also mentioned they should pause their production until they can give assurance of the matter. They should also be penalized even if it was indirectly done.

What else would you personally like a company to do in such a situation?

Better and safe work conditions for all, reasonable hours with overtime pay, more job security and stability, more responsibilities that come with more pay, and more honest and open disclosure of their practices and methods of operation. And allowing communities to own their own cities, and letting communities claim ownership over resources and respect those claims, stop poisoning people, and lead the way in sustainability since resource depletion effects them as well, and planning ahead puts them in a better position to survive the coming changes.
Really, there are many things I'd like to see them do. If they wouldn't be taking all the money and resources for themselves and would quit with the exploitation, I'd even be willing to reevaluate Capitalism in that current state.

 

[suncowiam]

Better and safe work conditions for all, reasonable hours with overtime pay, more job security and stability, more responsibilities that come with more pay, and more honest and open disclosure of their practices and methods of operation. And allowing communities to own their own cities, and letting communities claim ownership over resources and respect those claims, stop poisoning people, and lead the way in sustainability since resource depletion effects them as well, and planning ahead puts them in a better position to survive the coming changes.
Really, there are many things I'd like to see them do. If they wouldn't be taking all the money and resources for themselves and would quit with the exploitation, I'd even be willing to reevaluate Capitalism in that current state.

All fair suggestions.

 

[gnomon]

Fair enough. I extended the topic albeit top quickly is the conclusion? =) It didn't make sense if I just created a separate post about stereotyping the rich in a debate forum, at least, IMO.

Ok, well, I think we're kind of beating a dead horse for a bit too long on this. So I'll respectfully just step away from this conversation. Thank you again for sharing your feedback.

Actually I think you should start a different thread just for the sake of forum decorum.

I have to admit......even though I fully believe the OP's point was hijacked and I was perhaps a bit over the top in my statement as such.....you created an interesting conversation of it's own. A topic deserving of it's own thread of discussion.

edit: And....as is common with me...I apologize if I came across as a bit harsh.

 

[suncowiam]

Actually I think you should start a different thread just for the sake of forum decorum.

I have to admit......even though I fully believe the OP's point was hijacked and I was perhaps a bit over the top in my statement as such.....you created an interesting conversation of it's own. A topic deserving of it's own thread of discussion.

edit: And....as is common with me...I apologize if I came across as a bit harsh.

I rather you be harsh and have it directed towards me. I'm a big boy now. So, again, I really do appreciate the straight forwardness. Thanks

 

[gnomon]

I rather you be harsh and have it directed towards me. I'm a big boy now. So, again, I really do appreciate the straight forwardness. Thanks

I can only respect that.